I am not a proponent of locking up personal safety devices, however because I have taught my family the correct use of a weapon and self defense using them, will not deter an intruder from getting their hands on them if and when I am not home (a robbery), when I am on vacation and my child decides to hold a party where kids many times go throughout the house and steal things or case it for future burglary.My daughter has never done this and is off in college at this point, but it does happen.The alcohol and prescription drugs that sit around a house should also not be available to kids. No there is no law on these things, but if my child gets alcohol from our house, takes it to a party and gets busted, and she says she got it from home, I am liable for a supplying alcohol to a minor charge whether I ok'd it or not.(I for one believe if you are allowed to vote and/or die for your country, you should be able to drink alcohol--but that is a whole other thought!).fiwhat about if there are firearms in your home and you wish for them not to be locked up? maybe each member of your home should have to have attended and pass some type of firearms safety class? It not only promotes safety, but gives training that maybe a family instructor might not have given.

I do think we need some way to control the ability of the "unwanteds" getting their hands on weapons. I would also be for having background checks with a longer waiting period and weapon transfers being regulated so that the "unwanteds or criminals" don't get their hands on them.

I also think that people that get arrested with a weapon that are felons, that the penalties should be much stiffer. right now they do stupid stuff like give them job training because that's why the were robbing people in the first place-instead of locking them up for a few years.

I could easily argue that support for trigger locks and longer waiting periods is far more restrictive to the defensive shooter than my support for mag capacity limits. Trigger locks? No good when glass breaks and heavy footsteps are headed down your hallway. Longer waiting periods? What about the non gun owner who is threatened by a jilted boyfriend? He says he's coming for her and the kids tonight! The police say they don't have the staffing to leave a cop in her parking lot all night! Three days seems too long to her. Or suppose your son comes home from college or the service the day before the deer opener? Why can't you run him down to Walmart and buy him a new gun? So what if they can't go out and buy a 50 rd drum?

Don't get me wrong, I'm open to the suggestions. Nothing should be off the table, and I'm gald we are getting beyond the same old BS. But I'm more concerned with the suicidal kook with body armor and multiple 30 rd mags than the person sleeping with a .38 next to their bed or the legitimate gun buyer.

How about this? One, a law requiring any gun seller (private or dealer) to clear all sales through a national data base that red flags any history of violence, drug addiction, crime or mental illness. If a buyer fails the background check, they must appeal through the ATF for a waiver. Two, the classification of high-cap mags as a Class III item, just like full autos. You can buy them and own them, as long as you go through the paperwork and pay the fees. If you really want to prepare for doomsday, what's a little paperwork?

"Mandatory" firearms training from an outside source? No way. Number one, I probably know as much as the person teaching the course, and two, I taught my wife and my daughter (as well as several other people) the basics of firearm handling. If anything what I would maybe favor is that someone would have to pass a firearm handling test before they could purchase their first firearm, although like I said when I gave my daugher her first firearm when she went off into the world she probably knew as much as anyone versed in firearm safety because I taught her.

If someone doesn't feel they know enough to teach someone, or they have kids who "just won't listen" (gee..ya think that just MAYBE they aren't ready to have a firearm???), then maybe the outside source is a good option and they should go that route without being told. What's that word that keeps popping up......."personal responsibility"???

IMO, the ability to handle a firearm is a basic life skill, just like potty training and learning how to be a productive, responsible human being. All of these things are best taught but the parent, and just like we did not need someone else to teach our daugher how to do these things we also didn't need them to teach her how to handle a firearm.

I'm new here, and just finished reading this thread all the way through. Let me introduce myself and get into my reasons against any changes in the current gun laws. I'm 59 years old, disabled, and have been shooting and hunting since the age of 8. I have custody of my 16 year old step-grandson, and started teaching him to shoot and handle a firearm at age 5. He's been hunting since age 8 and taking his own stand without me by his side ever since. He has his own guns on a gun rack in his bedroom, and I have never worried about him doing anything inappropriate, since I taught him the proper respect for guns when he was a baby playing with toy pistols.

I'm a SC concealed weapons permit holder in a state that requires every gun purchase from a FFL dealer to have a SC Law Enforcement Background Check run through NICS.....the same requirement for getting a cwp, along with taking and passing a course, range certification, fingerprinting, and payment of a fee for a 4 year permit. When I go into a gun store to purchase, there are no limits on how many guns, or types of guns I can purchase at any one time, and there is no restriction against purchasing the ammo at the same time. I go in and decide on what I want to buy, fill out the 4473 form, provide my cwp and dl for the dealer to photocopy, pay the man and walk out of the door with my purchases. Anyone who doesn't have a cwp, must wait for the background check and if it takes longer than 3 days, the sale is completed automatically. See, I live in a state where gun ownership and hunting is a tradition and a right. Are there limits, yes. I can not carry concealed or open in "gun free zones", or in any business that has a sign prohibiting concealed carry. To me, those are more stringent than they should be, since those are the places an armed psychopath is most likely to go on a rampage such as Sandy Hook.

People ask me why I carry a gun, and my answer is simple. I am too old and disabled to fight with my fists any longer and when I consider the lack of discipline and respect that is prevalent in our society today, I will be prepared for any situation. Maybe that's considered a callous attitude by some folks, but I prefer to call myself a realist......not a reactionary.

If we as American citizens bow to the anti-gun movement and allow any more restrictions under the Second Amendment than are already in place, then we will be the generation that allows the eventual complete disarming of all future Americans. Does anyone actually believe that tougher background checks are anything other than a smoke screen for gun registration? Does anyone actually believe that NICS destroys background check information after 90 days? Why is it that FFL dealers must retain all 4473 forms in perpetuity, along with a log book that indicates when, where and how any gun came into their possession as well as, when, and to whom it was sold, and those log books and 4473 forms must be available for inspection by BATFE at all times? Isn't that registration, enough?

As for the misinformation and outright lies spread by the anti-gun crowd's propaganda machines, it's up to us, the legal gun owners through discussion to educate the gullible individuals who buy their line. It's up to us to support the NRA, The Second Amendment Foundation, Gun Owners of America, and our individual state's gun rights organizations as they battle the progressive ever left leaning liberal takeovers of our Constitutional rights. As someone else mentioned in this thread, if we give them one inch, they will take a foot. To that my response is they will actually take a mile. There are no legitimate reasons for banning any type of magazine, style of gun, or instituting tougher background checks, when the laws are already in place that should be enforced more thoroughly. When criminals get a slap on the wrist, instead or real punishment, then the resultant breakdown in the criminal justice system is the true culprit.......not guns and magazines! People want to prevent the psychopaths from getting guns and that's fine and well; but, when it's discovered that they have lied on the form 4473, where is the prosecution for that? Many of our armed citizens are veterans, and many have been diagnosed with PTSD, under the law, those folks can be denied the right to own a gun; is that fair? Once the government decides that someone is mentally unstable, for whatever reason, it's almost impossible to get a misdiagnosis reversed and rights restored. No one has addressed these concerns when discussing limits on mentally unstable(according to who) individuals. Should we as a nation have all children at the age of 12 go through a psychiatric evaluation to determine if they are predisposed to psychopathic tendencies? If so, then why not do just that and then tattoo "mental defective" on their foreheads. That would preclude any chance at falsifying information in order to purchase a gun. My point is where do we decide the limit is and or should be?

My right to own any semi-automatic weapon is just as basic as my right to own a single shot .410 or .22! The current proposed changes to those laws already would make my Remington 1100 with a thumb hole stock (one feature that emulates an "assault weapon"), illegal ! My Mossberg 500 with a magazine capacity of 8 rounds is going to be an illegal gun! Can any one of us say with absolute certainty that there will not be an effort to eventually outlaw even a double barrel or O/U? How about a 9 shot .22 revolver? As I pointed out, if we give 'em an inch, they will not stop until they have taken a mile!

It's not Durbin's place, nor is it Bloomberg's or Feinsteins, Boxer's, Schumer's, Leiberman's, Emmanual's, Holder's, or Obama's to decide for me or any other American citizen what should be allowed or banned. That decision was made when the founders wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual. Thomas Jefferson

The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.